Intel Core i7-12700 Review + Intel B660 Motherboard + RM1 Box Cooler

QuantumPhysics

Posts: 6,308   +7,247
"Bottom line, the Core i7-12700 and in particular the F variant look to be an awesome value options for high-end gaming."

It's very nice to see these new CPU, but I'm wondering, right now:

#1 what is the most demanding game on the market right now to be used in testing?

#2 Should Cyberpunk be used for testing considering how buggy it is?
 

maroon1

Posts: 129   +143
This show that Alder Lake power efficiency is great. It scales well with low TDP and you don't lose a lot of performance at lower power

It performs great even when you force it to run at 65w

 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,460   +2,420
Impressive.
AMD took too long. I said they were taking too long after I seen Zen+ and then Zen 2. And with a poor software product stack, they can't compete with hardware alone. More cores was never going to save them. Neither will more cache on existing Zen 3 parts, or part since only the 5800X 3D is said to be getting it. It better launch with a price cut. My guess it will be underwhelming.

Intel still has Raptor Lake coming this year. Zen 4 better be amazing.
 

Nintenboy01

Posts: 217   +174
I noticed the retention bracket often leaves little marks/scratches on the side tabs of the IHS. I wonder if that's by design so they can easily tell if a processor has been used already.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,211   +4,250
Not sure how I feel about the fact that there's 2 power limits enforced on the exact same chip. On one hand, I think it's undeniably duplicitous since your average consumer if they even bother to look up performance review, will only look at the top results that show something like a 12700 using a Z690 motherboard and watercooling and believe "Wow this actually comfortably beats even the 5950x from AMD!?"

But then they're likely to get a b660 motherboard and just use the stock cooler meaning they'll definitively never break out of that 65 watts power limit and notice not just some performance difference in benchmarks but likely in real world use cases because well, it's heavily power constrained jumping down 2 full generations to Ryzen 3000 or intel 10gen series (EDIT: To be fair that's just the worst case scenario most of the other benchmarks are probably ok at 65 watts)

But on the other hand, in a perfect world without marketing tricks of switch and bait....I kinda like having a single CPU that can scale up and down according to what you might want or need out of it. Not saying it's practical to think "I'll take my chip from a small itx based case with stock cooler to a 240 AIO full throttle rig regularly" because of course is impractical, but it is an interesting new paradigm when it comes to "future proofing"

Is worst than AMD supporting AM4 for a substantially longer timeframe that intel supports their platforms don't get me wrong, but it is at least feasible than people get their build up and running under the constrains initially and then "upgrade" with the same chip and just drop an i3 on the existing one to become a secondary/hand-me-down rig for example.
 
Last edited:
I was comparing some values with those obtained in the 5800x review (https://www.techspot.com/review/2134-amd-ryzen-5800x/). At the time, the gaming tests were performed using a RTX 3090 GPU and in the Watch Dogs Legion 1080p benchmark @ Ultra, the 10700k got 86/115 fps while the 5800X got 85/115 fps.
Now, using a 6900 XT in the same game @ Very High, the 10700k gets 84/117 fps and the 5800X gets 93/130 fps. Is it a consequence of SAM/ReBAR, a sign of the 10700k bottlenecking or something else?
 

Kosmoz

Posts: 600   +1,110
I was comparing some values with those obtained in the 5800x review (https://www.techspot.com/review/2134-amd-ryzen-5800x/). At the time, the gaming tests were performed using a RTX 3090 GPU and in the Watch Dogs Legion 1080p benchmark @ Ultra, the 10700k got 86/115 fps while the 5800X got 85/115 fps.
Now, using a 6900 XT in the same game @ Very High, the 10700k gets 84/117 fps and the 5800X gets 93/130 fps. Is it a consequence of SAM/ReBAR, a sign of the 10700k bottlenecking or something else?
It's actually because of the nvidia driver overhead issue, see HUB's video that shows exactly this issue.

Simply put nvidia uses more of the CPU for their GPUs to function than Radeon does, so that's why at 1080p where CPU matters more, you can see RX 6900 XT beating the 3090 and even at 1440p, usually. Plus the fact that it has more raster power at lower resolutions...

This is the reason why Steve is using the RX 6900 XT now (or since that test) at 1080p instead of the 3090, because the AMD card is faster.

It's also the reason why Jensen threw a fit crying his ePeen, because the 3090 loses at 1080p and now he invented the 3090 "Tie" to reclaim the crown at all resolutions.
 

Faelan

Posts: 146   +158
Look at that 12700 go at 65w. It’s awesome. Makes my 12900K look gluttonous in comparison. I’ll downclock, undervolt and limit the living daylights out of it when summer comes around if the performance penalty is really that low.
 

Aryassen

Posts: 207   +236
Look at that 12700 go at 65w. It’s awesome. Makes my 12900K look gluttonous in comparison. I’ll downclock, undervolt and limit the living daylights out of it when summer comes around if the performance penalty is really that low.
Agreed, it is truly a compelling case. I'm using my 3600 that way (capped at 65W), and the performance penalty is really not noticeable (I'm not running CB loops though...but in gaming there is practically no impact, in transcoding there is a 3-400 MHz drop, which is like 10% clock speed loss, and even less % FPS loss...I can live with that :) ).

And the 12700 is waaay more powerful at 65W. Let's see pricing, and the response from AMD...good times ahead :)
 

erickmendes

Posts: 655   +294
Ok... I think there's been a lot of Intel biased comparison after Alder Lake launch... I really would like to see 5600x results on these charts... 5800x isn't a cheap part... A 5600x here in Brazil is going for half the price of a 12700k, then you add the cost of getting a lga 1700 compatible motherboard...

First of all... If you are gaming at 1080p, the best choice would be to be using a 3060 Ti Class GPU, this would get you in 120 fps ground if paired with a 5600x... Then even if you consider 1440p where CPUs is less of a bottleneck then GPU, you could be really well served with a 5600x and a 3070 to break 120 fps... I got myself a water cooled Asus Rog 6900xt, I had a "reference" RX 6800 xt, RTX 3080, and now I'm using a RTX 3070, for cpu I had from a 10600k all the way up to 10900k, and in AMD side I got 5600x, 5800x, 5900x, lastly a 59550x and now I'm happy with a 5600g, paired with a 3070 Asus Strix...

Know what? My 6900xt paired with a 5950x gave me 260 fps on 1440p on some games, even with a 240Hz monitor, the only difference I've noted from going all the way from this overkill combo to the 3070 non Ti/5600g combo is in my wallet... this cheaper combo gives me less heat to deal with, uses less power, and now I'm getting 200 fps ... Input lag is the same, close to zero.

So considering the 12700 a good deal at it's current prices when you can have a very similar experience with a 10700k or even a 5600x for less...

I don't know. I keep on thinking... If it was an AMD launch, would all enthusiast media be so nice on AMD? Like, Alder Lake really is an revolutionary design, but taking gaming performance it's more of a evolutionary step, one that need a new motherboard, even if you go the DDR4 path... So would all tech media congratulates AMD the same as they are applauding Intel? ... I wouldn't bet on that...

I don't know... perhaps I'm just getting older, and shinning new things don't lure me anymore just because it's new.

Breaking News: Intel f@rts
Media: Shut up and take my money
Breaking News: AMD releases 1024 cores 12624 threads CPU
Media: Hm... Let's bench it... after they patch Windows 14...
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,460   +2,420
Ok... I think there's been a lot of Intel biased comparison after Alder Lake launch... I really would like to see 5600x results on these charts... 5800x isn't a cheap part... A 5600x here in Brazil is going for half the price of a 12700k, then you add the cost of getting a lga 1700 compatible motherboard...

First of all... If you are gaming at 1080p, the best choice would be to be using a 3060 Ti Class GPU, this would get you in 120 fps ground if paired with a 5600x... Then even if you consider 1440p where CPUs is less of a bottleneck then GPU, you could be really well served with a 5600x and a 3070 to break 120 fps... I got myself a water cooled Asus Rog 6900xt, I had a "reference" RX 6800 xt, RTX 3080, and now I'm using a RTX 3070, for cpu I had from a 10600k all the way up to 10900k, and in AMD side I got 5600x, 5800x, 5900x, lastly a 59550x and now I'm happy with a 5600g, paired with a 3070 Asus Strix...

Know what? My 6900xt paired with a 5950x gave me 260 fps on 1440p on some games, even with a 240Hz monitor, the only difference I've noted from going all the way from this overkill combo to the 3070 non Ti/5600g combo is in my wallet... this cheaper combo gives me less heat to deal with, uses less power, and now I'm getting 200 fps ... Input lag is the same, close to zero.

So considering the 12700 a good deal at it's current prices when you can have a very similar experience with a 10700k or even a 5600x for less...

I don't know. I keep on thinking... If it was an AMD launch, would all enthusiast media be so nice on AMD? Like, Alder Lake really is an revolutionary design, but taking gaming performance it's more of a evolutionary step, one that need a new motherboard, even if you go the DDR4 path... So would all tech media congratulates AMD the same as they are applauding Intel? ... I wouldn't bet on that...

I don't know... perhaps I'm just getting older, and shinning new things don't lure me anymore just because it's new.
With Zen 4 you'll also need a new motherboard.

1080p gamers that are building new systems or doing a platform upgrade should be seriously looking at ADL, because we know it's faster than Zen at that resolution especially.

12700 is an 8-core part. 5600X is 6-core. The 6-core 12400 is said to be very close to the 5600X at ~$220usd when it drops. The 6-core 12600 is faster and $30 cheaper than the 5600X in Canada.
 

erickmendes

Posts: 655   +294
With Zen 4 you'll also need a new motherboard.

12700 is an 8-core part. 5600X is 6-core. The 6-core 12400 is said to be very close to the 5600X at ~$220usd when it drops. The 6-core 12600 is faster and $30 cheaper than the 5600X in Canada.

Ok, but to get 12400 you also need a new motherboard... And I didn't even said anything about Zen4. I still think most media outlets are softer on Intel launches... And down here a 12600 is 30% more expensive than a 5600x.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,460   +2,420

Ok, but to get 12400 you also need a new motherboard... And I didn't even said anything about Zen4. I still think most media outlets are softer on Intel launches... And down here a 12600 is 30% more expensive than a 5600x.
If you want the newest tech and compatibility yes, you need a new motherboard to use them. That's how the industry has always been. Most buy prebuilts anyway, so they never have an issue. The rest of us know or should know what to expect.

The higher price in Brazil sounds more like a logistics issue or they aren't selling enough of them to get a price drop. South America doesn't represent the majority. Most gamers are in the US. The rest are in Asia and Europe.
 

yeeeeman

Posts: 470   +426
Ok, but to get 12400 you also need a new motherboard... And I didn't even said anything about Zen4. I still think most media outlets are softer on Intel launches... And down here a 12600 is 30% more expensive than a 5600x.
12400f is equivalent to a 5600x. Is that still higher priced than the 5600x?
 

dragosmp

Posts: 68   +74
I wonder if this is correct "Age of Empires IV" - this is Age 4, surely you're testing using 6? The line I after the V adds, before the V substracts. IV = 4, VI = 6
 

erickmendes

Posts: 655   +294
12400f is equivalent to a 5600x. Is that still higher priced than the 5600x?
Not avaliable, just 12600k, 12700k...
Anyway, I'm building an alternative gaming rig because I can't find any to buy my Asus Rog Strix B460-I... Gonna throw a 10700K or non K in it.

Gonna wait to see what Raptor Lake and Ryzen 7000 brings.
 

Mr Majestyk

Posts: 1,218   +1,113
Damn my 3700X is looking so slow now and I hate to think of the scores my 1700X would get. Well my next update is to either Raptor Lake or Zen 4, but if I go RL I will definitely get the locked 13700 unless they make major power reductions to make OCing worthwhile which it is not at all on AL.
 

GamerNerves

Posts: 175   +108
...

I don't know. I keep on thinking... If it was an AMD launch, would all enthusiast media be so nice on AMD? Like, Alder Lake really is an revolutionary design, but taking gaming performance it's more of a evolutionary step, one that need a new motherboard, even if you go the DDR4 path... So would all tech media congratulates AMD the same as they are applauding Intel? ... I wouldn't bet on that...

I've been thinking the same thing and am glad that you have noticed this existing trend as well, which actually has been around for ages. Also how relevant are the differences in gaming benchmarks anyway between Alder Lake and Zen 3? I think Alder Lake is for people who care about productivity performance or use their machine for such programs and gaming combined, though i5-12400/F is good for purely gaming as well and perhaps the other i5 models without E-cores depending on price.
The reason why hype exist is for people to lose focus on what matters. Also, Intel fans, who exist in the tech media too indeed, again and again largely don't want to mention the motherboard prices. I'm waiting the day when tech media truly becomes neutral.

Save your hype for Zen 4 people. ;)
 

Tom Sunday

Posts: 74   +10
[QUOTE="mgilbert: AMD started getting greedy several months ago. Now, they're going to have to back off. [/QUOTE]

People here can dance all they want. If I had the money and a real job I would by Alder Lake and not AMD. A simple decision of new more advance tech and research now available versus AMD old.
 
Last edited:

Tom Sunday

Posts: 74   +10
hahahanoobs. Most buy prebuilts anyway said:
I am still sitting here with a ‘bought used’ 2008 Dell XPS 730x as money and pricing for me is everything. Not brand names. Many real bargain hunters I regularly meet at the local computer show here still buy AMD even with knowing it’s not as smooth or performing as Intel. AMD is generally so much cheaper and people like me have learned in making due with less! Indeed the majority of my friends are on the lower-end of the food-chain so we are always hobbling together old hardware and hoping for better times ahead. Respectful greetings from the Walmart employee lunchroom with free WIFI and from the man on the street!
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 518   +298
And now Lisa Su cannot keep those ridiculous Ryzen prices she throwed at us in the last 14 months anymore...
 

Sausagemeat

Posts: 1,597   +1,422
Looks like Intel are back on top again. That was quick, I thought AMD would last longer than that. Maybe they have something exciting coming around the corner.
 

theruck

Posts: 548   +345
What I like about the alder lake that a 12400f is great as 11900 used to be but for half the price